Document vBKdXopmR5ajpg62Z74LqMR5E

TO FROM DATE RE MEMORANDUM Has Shah, Ph.D Carol Moors Toth May 1, 1996 Recent Federal Register Releases The following notices recently appeared in the Federal Register and may be of interest to the members of the Vinyl Chloride Transportation Panel. 1. Qualifications for Tankermen and Persons in charge of Transfers of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases. The Coast Guard has reopened its comment period in the above referenced docket to specifically address the following issues: 1) whether the person in charge of cargo-tank cleaning on a vessel, at a tank-cleaning facility or at a shipyard should be allowed to hold a marine chemists's certificate issued by the National Fire Protection Association instead of the Tankermen-person-in-charge endorsement; 2) the definition of the term "direct supervision;" 3) the use of a restricted endorsement which allows an applicant to apply for the tankermen endorsement restricted to specific cargoes or groups of cargoes, specific vessels, specific facilities, specific employers, or the like. 4) whether a tankermen person in charge should be required to serve 90 days at sea on tankers and, if so, how tankermen certified under prior regulations should be treated. Comments are due May 28, 1996. This docket is reopening an Interim Rule on the Qualifications for Tankermen and for Persons in Charge of transfers of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases. The interim final rule became effective March 31, 1996. CMA 111643 2. Hazardous Materials in Intrastate Transport DOT has issued a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking and announced a public meeting to discuss its proposed rule to extend the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) to intrastate transport. The notice of proposed rulemaking is seeking to exempt certain "materials of trade" from the application of DOT'S HMR. Additionally, the notice proposes to exempt non specification cargo tank motor vehicles with a capacity of less than 3500 gallons and used in intrastate transport of hazardous materials from DOT'S HMR. Comments to this rulemaking are due June 17, 1996; the public meeting will be held on May 14, 1996 in Washington D.C. kk*kk Copies of the Federal Register notices are attached. If you have any questions regarding these notices, please give me a call at 202-434-4209. CMA 111644 11484 federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 20. 1996 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (HM-200) and be submitted, if possible, in five copies. Persons wishing to Research and Special Programs receive confirmation of receipt of their Administration comments should include a self- 49 CFR Parts 171,173 and 180 addressed stamped postcard showing the docket number. The Dockets Unit is [Docket No. HM-200; Notice No. 96-6] RIN 2137-AB37 located in Room 8419 of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, SW. Washington. DC 20590-0001. Hazardous Materials in Intrastate Transportation Telephone: 202-366-5046. Public dockets may be reviewed between, the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m., AGENCY: Research and Special Programs Monday through Friday except Federal Administration (RSPA), DOT. holidays. ACTION; Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) and notice of public meeting. * Public Meeting. The public meeting will be held at the Federal Aviation Administration Auditorium, Third Floor, 800 Independence Avenue, SW, SUMMARY: Based on the merits of Washington, DC. Any person wishing to comments received in response to a attend and/or present an oral statement notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) at the public meeting should notify to apply the Hazardous Materials Diane LaValle, by telephone or in Regulations (HMR) to intrastate writing, at least two days in advance of commerce by motor vehicle, RSPA is the hearing date. Each request must issuing these additional proposals. In identify the speaker; organization this document RSPA proposes: represented, if any; daytime telephone Exceptions from the HMR for certain number, and anticipated length of the small quantities of hazardous materials presentation, not to exceed 10 minutes. transported and used by carriers, Written text or oral statements should particularly private carriers, in the be presented to the hearing officer prior conduct of their businesses; exceptions to the oral presentation. for the continued use of nonspecification smaller cargo tank motor vehicles (i.e., less than 13,250 liters (3,500 gallons) capacity) used exclusively in intrastate transportation of flammable liquid petroleum products; and an exception from certain FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jackie Smith or Diane LaValle, 202366--8553, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards, RSPA. 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590-0001. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: requirements that address registered I. Background inspections of these smaller cargo tank motor vehicles, used exclusively for transporting flammable liquid petroleum fuels. These proposed actions are aimed at reducing regulatory burdens on persons subject to the HMR where costs may be disproportions! to safety benefits. This proposal may affect certain State variances. RSPA also is announcing a public meeting to solicit comments on the proposals contained in this docket. DATES: Written comments. Comments must be received on or before June 17, 1996. Public Meeting. A public meeting will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on May 14, 1996 in Washington. DC. Exceptions for materials of trade will be discussed from 9:00 a.m. to 12 noon. Cargo tank and registered inspection exceptions will be discussed from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. Currently, the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR parts 171180) do not apply to highway transportation by intrastate carriers with the exception of registration requirements and transportation of hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, marine pollutants, and flammable cryogenic liquids in portable tanks and cargo tanks. The HMR apply to all hazardous materials transported in commerce by rail car, aircraft or vessel. A July 1986 report by the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) entitled "Transportation of Hazardous Materials" highlighted the need for national uniformity in the regulation of hazardous materials transportation and packaging requirements. The reporting of hazardous materials incidents was specifically mentioned in the report as a prime area for extending the HMR to intrastate transportation, Of particular ADDRESSES: Comments. Address concern is a potential for lack of comments to Dockets Unit, Research uniform communication and a potential and Special Programs Administration, for miscommunication to emergency U.S. Department of Transportation, responders in identifying the presence Washington, DC 20590-0001. of hazardous materials regardless of Comments should identify the Docket ' whether transportation of the hazardous materials is intrastate or interstate. Based on this report and a requirement in the Federal hazardous materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5103(b)(1)) that RSPA regulate the transportation of hazardous materials in intrastate commerce, RSPA proposed to extend the application of the HMR to all intrastate transportation of hazardous materials in commerce in a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on July 9, 1993 [58 FR 36920] and a correction to the NPRM on July 15,1993 158 FR 38111). RSPA proposed that all intrastate shippers and carriers comply with the HMR. The NPRM requested comments on the need for, and potential consequences of, extending the application of the HMR to all intrastate transportation in commerce. Except for bulk packagings, RSPA proposed to require compliance within one year after publication of the final rule. RSPA proposed a three-year transition period [from October 1, 1993) for continued use of certain bulk packagings used to transport hazardous materials not currently regulated in intrastate commerce, provided these packagings are used exclusively by intrastate carriers and are specifically authorized by the State in which they are operated. RSPA believed that the proposed threeyear transition period would provide adequate time for intrastate motor carriers to bring their bulk packagings into conformance with the HMR. More than 230 comments were received in response to the NPRM, a significant number addressing matters that were not raised in response to the advance notice of proposed rulemaking RSPA published on June 29,1987 [52 FR 24195]. This SNPRM is responsive to many of those matters, including concerns raised in regard to the operation of smaller cargo tank motor vehicles. II. Issues Addressed in This Supplemental Notice The issues addressed in this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) are exceptions for: (1) "materials of trade," (2) non specification smaller cargo tank motor vehicles (i.e., less than 13,250 liters (3,500 gailon) capacity) used exclusively in intrastate transportation of flammable liquid petroleum products, and (3) certain requirements addressing use of registered inspectors for these smaller cargo tank motor vehicles used to transport flammable liquid petroleum fuels only. CMA 111645 t Federal Register / Vol. 61. No. 55 / Wednesday, March 20, 1996 / Proposed Rules 11485 A. Materials of Trade relatively small quantity of these either the manufacturer's original If the proposals in the July 1993 notice were adopted without change, all hazardous materials that are normally carried on a motor vehicle; (2) the packaging or a packaging of equal or greater strength and integrity. For ij applicable regulations in the HMR general reliance on a DOT specification example, a flammable liquid from a 55- would apply to the carriage of many or U.N. standard packaging (or gallon polyethylene drum could be A materials of trade, RSPA received approximately a dozen comments on the issue of materials of trade. The HMR currently provide certain limited exceptions for hazardous materials that are transported by private carriers as "materials of trade." For example, 173.5 provides exceptions from certain marking and packaging requirements for private earners transporting specified quantities of formulated agricultural chemicals. However, the commenters requested that RSPA consider additional regulatory exceptions to allow-for the transportation of hazardous materials that are used in support of business operations, particularly with regard to transportation by private carriers in intrastate commerce, many of whom are components thereof) as the principal packaging: and (3) a motor vehicle operator's familiarity with the hazardous material. These materials of trade would include, subject to certain limitations, hazardous materials carried on a motor vehicle for protecting the health and safety of the motor vehicle operator, such as insect repeilant or selfcontained breathing apparatus or for supporting the operation or maintenance of a motor vehicle, such as a spare battery or engine starting fluid. They would also include certain hazardous materials carried by a private motor carrier engaged in a principal business which is other than transportation, such as lawn mowing, plumbing, welding, and door-to-door sale of consumer goods. repacked in a smaller polyethylene drum or a steel drum that provides equal or greater strength and integrity. In addition. 173.6 proposes to except receptacles (e.g., cans and bottles) from the outside packaging requirement if they are secured against movement in cages, carts, bins, boxes or compartments. For gasoline, packaging must be made of metal or plastic and conform to requirements of the HMR, or those of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration specified in 29 CFR 1910.106. By the action it is proposing in this SNPRM, RSPA intends that State and local fire codes that prohibit use of glass containers for gasoline not be preempted, A cylinder or other pressure vessel containing a Division 2.1 or 2.2 material small business entities.' The Conference on Safe Transportation of Hazardous Articles, In proposed 173.6. RSPA has must fully conform to the packaging identified types and quantities of certain requirements of the HMR and the categories of hazardous materials * qualification, maintenance and use ot Inc., and the Edison Electric Institute's Utility Nuclear Waste and Transportation Program strongly commonly carried as materials of trade for which exceptions would be provided. Specific limitations and cylinder requirements in 173.34. An exception from the requirements for use of an outer packaging is provided in encouraged RSPA to not regulate local provisions are proposed to strike a proposed 173.6(d)(3). movements of relatively small quantities balance between safety and costs. Each Hazard communication requirements of hazardous materials used in the field hazard class and division has been proposed in 173.6 specify that DOT (e.g., those carried by plumbers, doctors, considered to determine how the specification cylinders, with the roofers and lawn service personnel). materials of trade exception may be exception of the DOT-39, would The Utility Solid Waste Group applied to maximize the number of continue to be subject to marking and submitted a petition for rulemaking (P- entities and operations that would be labeling requirements specified in the 1248) proposing exceptions from the covered by it, while minimizing the HMR. Each DOT-39 cylinder must HMR for materials of trade. Other risks to hazmat employees, emergency display the markings Specified in petitions addressing certain exceptions responders, and members of the general 178.65-14. Any other packaging must for materials of trade include the ublic who may be exposed to these be marked with an indication of the Georgia Public Service Commission (P- azardous materials during hazardous material that it contains. The 1209), the Association of American transportation. hazard communication requirement Railroads (P-1058), and the Maryland Proposed 173.6 applies limitations specifies that a vehicle operator be Department of Transportation (P-1098). on the maximum quantity per packaging informed that a material of trade is These commenters suggest that and the total quantity per motor vehicle. being carried on the motor vehicle and thousands of intrastate businesses For example. 173,6 proposes to allow of the requirements pertaining to the affected by HM-200 would face a gross mass of up to 30 kg (66 pounds) transportation of the material of trade, impracticable regulatory requirements. per packaging for a Class 6, packing e.g., packaging and vehicle quantity As an example, they cite a routine group II or III material, and a gross mass limitations, packaging markings and situation involving a consumer of up to 75 kg (165 pounds) for a securement of packagings to protect 4 commodity (class ORM-D) hazardous Division 2.1 material. Furthermore, the against damage. material (e.g., a can of spray paint) aggregate gross weight of all materials of When transported by motor vehicle in transported in a service vehicle. Under trade on a motor vehicle, as proposed, conformance with 173.6, materials of the current regulations, when may not exceed 150 kg (330 pounds). trade would not be subject to any other transported for use by the carrier, the Proposed 173.6 would exclude the requirements of the HMR except as consumer commodity would have to be following materials that present stated in the section. A provision is transported in a closed and marked significant risk: (1) Self-reactive (see proposed in paragraph (f) of 173.6 to outer box, thereby making it impractical 173.124(a)(2)); (2) poisonous-by clarify that both materials of trade and to use. inhalation (see 173.133); and (3) other hazardous materials could be Prompted by comments submitted to specific UN identification numbers transported on the same motor vehicle the docket and petitions for rulemaking, associated with the hazardous materials without affecting the applicability of the RSPA is proposing to limit regulatory description in the 172.101 Table. exception provided for the material of requirements for the transportation of Additional provisions in 173.6 trade. By providing an exception for certain hazardous materials used as include packaging and hazard materials of trade, RSPA believes it is materials of trade. Factors leading to communication requirements. The taking a common sense approach in RSPA's determination include: (1) The packaging for a material of trade must be regard to applicability of the HMR to CMA 111646 11486 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 20, 1996 / Proposed Rules small and local business entities. The anticipated beneficiaries of materials of trade exceptions would primarily be small businesses that perform services such as plumbing, welding, lawn care, painting, pest control, swimming pool maintenance and a number of different activities related to farming. Companies, such as public utilities, will also benefit in regard to operation of their service vehicles. In addition, the proposed exception would apply to any type of carriage by motor vehicle (including common motor carriers) if the material, such as engine starting fluid, is used in association,with the operation of the motor vehicle in which it is transported. RSPA is proposing application of these exceptions to both interstate and intrastate carriage. No new or additional cost burdens are anticipated. B. Exceptions for Non-Specification Bulk Packagings Used in Intrastate Transportation RSPA received more than 100 comments from petroleum carriers and farmers and their trade associations regarding the elimination of exceptions authorized by the States. Many of these commenters recommended that States be allowed the flexibility to determine who would be subject to the regulations. Petroleum marketers from several States contended that, if the proposal to regulate the transportation of hazardous materials in intrastate commerce replaces current State regulations, they would be forced to remove cargo tanks from hazardous materials service or retrofit them to conform to the applicable DOT specifications at prohibitive costs. In comments responding to the NPRM, the Petroleum Marketers Association of American (PMAA) urged-- * * RSPA to provide an exemption from the requirements of 49 CFR part 180 and subparts D and F of part 173 for non specification bulk packagings with capacities less than 3,500 gallons used to transport Hazard Classes 2.1 and 3 materials in intrastate commerce only where (1) the packaging is used exclusively in a State where its use for the materiel being transported was specifically authorized by statute or regulation of that State, and was specifically and continuously authorized on or before October 1,1993; (2) the packaging complies with all requirements of the State; and (3) each shipment is offered in conformance with all other applicable requirements of this subchapter. PMAA believes that-- Providing an exemption from the specification cargo tank requirements for small business petroleum marketers, as outlined above, would hardly create a glaring loophole in the HMR. If RSPA denies this request for an exemption, then PMAA respectfully requests that a ten to fifteen year transition period be given in proposed subpart 171.1(c) to allow affected small business petroleum marketers to fully utilize their cunem cargo tanks. In an attempt to maintain an acceptable level of safety without unduly burdening the many small businesses that operate smaller cargo tank motor vehicles, RSPA is proposing in paragraph (b) of 173.8 to except from the HMR's cargo tank specification requirement certain cargo tank motor vehicles that have a capacity of less than 13,250 liters (3,500 gallons). As provided in paragraph (c) of 173.8, excepted cargo tanks may only be operated by intrastate motor carriers for transportation of flammable liquid petroleum products in conformance with the laws of the States in which they are operated. RSPA believes that this proposed exception is responsive to PMAA's request, thereby minimizing the economic impacts on those small intrastate businesses that currently operate non-specification smaller cargo tank motor vehicles. Since the exception applies only to those smaller cargo tank motor vehicles in operation prior to July 1, 1996, no additional non-specification smaller cargo tank motor vehicles would be authorized after that date. As these small businesses replace equipment, they would be required to replace such equipment with specification cargo tank motor vehicles. Comments are requested on the proposal to allow continued use of these non-specification smaller cargo tank motor vehicles beyond the three years initially proposed and the 10 to 15 years requested by PMAA. If comments on this issue provide sufficient justification to adopt any specific time limitation after October 1,1996, e.g.. a three year or a 10 to 15 year limitation, RSPA may revise,the final rule issued under this docket accordingly. It must be noted that, although RSPA is proposing to provide an exception from the specification requirements for smaller cargo tanks used to transport liquid petroleum products, all other applicable requirements of the HMR would apply. These include marking and placarding vehicles, hazmat training requirements, shipping paper and emergency response information requirements, and the applicable modal requirements. The extended (October 1, 1996) compliance period proposed in 173.8(b) covers only parts 173 and 178 (for non-specification petroleum cargo tank motor vehicles) and part 180. In addition, the provisions of part 180 that apply to a DOT MC-306 cargo tank for an annual external visual and leakage test, a five year visual and hydrostatic or pneumatic test, would be applicable to smaller cargo tanks that are otherwise excepted from the specification requirements; however, the cargo tank manhole assembly requirements in 180.405(g) would not apply. If periodic maintenance, inspections and repairs are being performed on smaller non-specification tanks, as indicated by PMAA and other commenters, then any incremental costs associated with this rulemaking would be minimal. If they are not being performed, RSPA believes those costs associated with ensuring an acceptable level of continuing cargo tank integrity (e.g., no leakage, secure closures, and no significant damage) are justifiable when considering such cargo tank motor vehicles are used for transportation of gasoline. PMAA also requested that an exception be provided for cargo tanks of less than 13.250 liters (3,500 gallons) used to transport Class 2,1 materials. RSPA has not proposed to include cargo tank motor vehicles with a capacity of less than 13,250 liters (3,500 gallons) used to transport Class 2.1 in the exception. The HMR provide an exception for the use of non specification cargo tanks for transporting liquefied petroleum gas (see 173.315(k)) and there is no proposal to revise or eliminate that exception. Therefore, providing the additional exception requested by PMAA is not necessary. Also proposed in 173.8 is an authorization for the use of other nonspecification bulk packagings authorized by State regulations until June 30,1999, as initially proposed in the NPRM. Those bulk packagings would not be required to conform to the requirements specified in 173.8(c), including the requirements in part 180 as they were MC 306 cargo tanks. After June 30,1999, these bulk packagings must be in full compliance with the requirements of the HMR. ,C. Registered Inspector Exception Prior to January 1,1991, the HMR's inspection and periodic retest requirements did not apply to cargo tank motor vehicles with a capacity of 3,000 gallons or less used exclusively in flammable liquid service. This exception was fully evaluated and ultimately removed in a final rule published June 12,1989 under Docket HM-183 (54 FR 24982). Commenters to Docket HM-183 representing the petroleum marketing industry (i.e., distributors of gasoline, fuels and other petroleum products) opposed the change. Some of these commenters also objected to the proposal in this rulemaking to apply the inspection and periodic retest CMA 111647 T: 0 R;i k IB t-51 wi i requirements to cargo tanks used in intrastate transportation. PMAA commented that compliance with Federal cargo tank regulations as adopted under HM--183 for inspection and testing would result in the loss of a substantial amount of work and service hours for employees and cargo tanks. Currently, a motor carrier must employ a registered inspector or must have the cargo tank inspected by a registered inspector. PMAA said that this may result in a significant loss of revenue due to removal of a cargo tank from service and payment of fees to a registered inspector. Several commenters stated that they had already performed periodic maintenance and inspection of their smaller cargo tanks and, therefore, the proposal to subject these vehicles to periodic inspections was unnecessary. One commenter asserted that its vehicles were inspected annually by State fire marshals and, therefore, the exception should be retained. RSPA believes that only a few State and local agencies have enacted regulations governing the maintenance and testing of smaller cargo tanks. RSPA proposes to revise 180.409 to allow a person to perform an annual external visual inspection and leakage test on a cargo tank motor vehicle of less than 13.250 liters (3,500 gallons) capacity that is used exclusively for transportation of flammable liquid petroleum fuels (e.g., gasoline and diesel fuel) without being a registered inspector. Under this proposal, that person would be permitted to use one of its employees to perform the visual inspection and leakage test as required by 180.407(c). The employee would not be required to be a registered inspector, although the employee would have to be trained and be familiar with the inspection requirements ( 180.407) for the cargo tank being inspected, how to identify defects and the proper performance of the leakage test. The documentation required to be maintained by 180.417(b) could be signed by the employee rather than a registered inspector. The employee performing the annual visual inspection and leakage test would be subject to the appropriate training required in part 172, subpart H--Training. Routine cargo tank maintenance could be performed by the operator. Other tests required for a cargo tank by 180.407(c) would still be performed by a registered inspector. Cargo tank repair, modification, stretching and rebarreling would be performed by a registered facility. RSPA believes that this proposal will provide savings to both interstate and intrastate motor carriers who operate these smaller cargo tank motor vehicles, III. Discussion of Other Comments to the NPRM Many commenters to the NPRM mistakenly believe that issuance of a final rule under this docket will require intrastate motor carriers to comply with the provisions of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR). For example, commenters stated that additional costs would be inclined by farmers to obtain a Commercial Driver's License (CDL) with a hazardous materials endorsement, and insurance. RSPA does not believe that the proposed rule, if adopted, will subject any additional carriers to the FMCSR. All intrastate motor carriers that meet the criteria in 49 CFR 383.23 are already required to possess a CDL, unless a waiver is granted pursuant to 49 CFR 383.7 (and the proposed rule would not change this waiver authority). Intrastate earners of hazardous materials in bulk are already required to meet the financial responsibility requirements in 49 CFR Part 387, and this will not change, RSPA has not proposed to extend the authority of the FMCSR to cover all intrastate motor carriers, but assumes confusion may have resulted from the provision in 177.804, which states that persons subject to the HMR must comply with the provisions m the FMCSR, to the extent those regulations apply. Section 177,804 does not broaden the application of requirements for motor carriers beyond those specifically required by the FMCSR. (See 49 CFR part 390.) For example, drivers of commercial motor vehicles may not drive in interstate commerce unless they meet certain medical qualification requirements. A driver for an intrastate motor carrier would only need to comply with those requirements if the State in which the carrier operates has adopted such requirements. If commenters believe that this rule would impose any additional costs, from application of the FMCSR or another agency's requirements, they should explain those costs and quantify them in detail. Several commenters objected to applying the HMR to the intrastate transportation of anhydrous ammonia. Again, RSPA does not believe that this proposed rule would make any change in the HMR's applicability to the transportation of anhydrous ammonia in intrastate commerce. Anhydrous ammonia is regulated as a hazardous substance when transported in quantities of 100 pounds or more and that the transportation of hazardous substances in intrastate commerce has been subject to the HMR since 1980. RSPA is required by law to regulate all hazardous substances designated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). In carrying out the statutory mandate, RSPA has no discretion to determine what is or is not a hazardous substance or the appropriate reportable quantity (RQ) for materials designated as hazardous substances. This authority is vested in EPA. Other comments reflected a misunderstanding regarding RSPA's intentions for current exceptions provided in the HMR for certain motor carrier operations. Currently, the HMR provide exceptions for use of non specification ammonia/liquified petroleum gas cargo tanks in 173.315, paragraphs (k), (m), and in Note 17 of the table. Section 173.315(k) authorizes the use of non-specification cargo tanks for the transportation of liquified petroleum gas in intrastate commerce, under specified conditions. Non specification cargo tanks are authorized for anhydrous ammonia in 173.315(m) and Note 17 of the table. Other exceptions for agricultural operations and oil field service vehicles are found in 173.5 and 173.7, respectively. . RSPA has not proposed to eliminate these excSptions from the HMR. Accordingly, if a final rule is issued under this docket, the provisions authorizing the use of non-specification packagings provided in those sections would remain valid under the conditions specified. Comments have been received under this proceeding and under Docket HM222 [60 FR 17049], expressing the view that business entities, such as those engaged in agriculture, should be permitted to conduct their operations under the provisions of State rather than Federal law if they choose. For many years, DOT has encouraged States to adopt the HMR. RSPA sponsors an outreach program called the Cooperative Hazardous Materials Enforcement Development Program (COHMED) that fosters coordination, cooperation, and communication between Federal and State agencies and Indian Nations having regulatory and enforcement responsibilities for the safe transportation of hazardous materials. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires States to adopt and enforce its Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSR 49 CFR parts 39CF397) and highway-related portions of the HMR, or comparable State rules and regulations, to qualify for grants under jCMA 111648 11488 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 20, 1996 / Proposed Rules FHWA"s Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP). All States have adopted the HMR for highway transportation however, some have provided exceptions from their application, particularly in regard to intrastate highway carriers. Some States have provided substantial exceptions from all regulation. For example, one State provides exceptions for significant quantities of hazardous materials when transported from retailer to final agricultural end user, or between final end users from farm to farm. Included in the exceptions are (1) 16,000 pounds (aggregate gross weight) or less ammonium nitrate fertilizer. (2) certain agricultural pesticides in Class 3 or Division 6.1 when moved in quantities of 5,000 pounds or less or 500 gallons or less volume in solution, and (3) gasoline and liquefied petroleum gas in quantities of 3,000 gallons or less. These materials are not subject to marking, labeling, placarding, shipping paper, emergency response information, or training requirements, except that vehicles transporting gasoline and liquefied petroleum gas must be placarded. RSPA has been asked to recognize such exceptions. RSPA believes that such broad exceptions are not in the public interest and are contrary to the Congressional intent that there be a uniform system of regulation for the safe transportation of hazardous materials. Of particular concern is the potential for lack of uniform communication and miscommunication to emergency responders in any location where they may encounter hazardous materials incidents. On the other hand, RSPA does provide an opportunity for States to obtain authorization for requirements that differ from those in the Federal regulations. A State may apply for a waiver of preemption for requirements that otherwise would be preempted by the Federal hazardous materials transportation law. This waiver provision, in 49 U.S.C. 5125(e), authorizes RSPA to waive preemption for a State requirement that provides at least an equivalent level of safety as the Federal law and regulations and is not an unreasonable burden on commerce. RSPA has established procedures for this waiver process in 49 CFR 107.215227. IV. Regulatory Reinvention Initiative On March 4,1995, President Clinton issued a memorandum to heads of departments and agencies calling for a review of all agency regulations and elimination or revision of those that are outdated or in need of reform. The President also directed that front line regulators "get out of Washington and create grassroots partnerships" with people affected by agency regulations. RSPA conducted an extensive review of the HMR to identify regulations that should be eliminated or revised. RSPA also has held 11 public meetings requesting comment on its hazardous materials program during 1995 at various locations nationwide and anticipates having more public meetings in 1996. Commenters at die public meetings addressed issues such as the need for exceptions for materials of trade and expressed concerns regarding the potential impacts of this rulemaking proceeding. Several stated that elimination of exceptions provided by States could cause them extreme hardships. A number of those concerns are addressed in this preamble and proposal. The proposals in this SNPRM are consistent with the President's goal to minimize regulatory requirements on industry, while maintaining an acceptable level of safety. V. Regulatory Analyses and Notices A. Executive Order 12866 and DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) is considered a significant regulatory action under section 3(0 of Executive Order 12866 and, therefore, was subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. The SNPRM is considered significant under the Regulatory Policies and Procedures of the Department of Transportation [44 FR 110341 due to significant public and congressional interest. A regulatory evaluation is available for review in the docket. B. Executive Order 12612 This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria in Executive Order 12612 ("Federalism"). The Federal hazardous materials transportation law (49 U.S.C. 5101-5127) contains an express preemption provision that preempts State, local, and Indian tribe requirements on certain covered subjects. Covered subjects are: (i) the designation, description, and classification of hazardous material; (ii) the packing, repacking, handling, labeling, marking, and placarding of hazardous material; (iii) the preparation, execution, and use of shipping documents pertaining to hazardous material and requirements respecting the number, content, and placement of those documents; (iv) the written notification, recording, and reporting of the unintentional release in transportation of hazardous material; or (v) the design, manufacturing, fabrication, marking, maintenance, reconditioning, repairing, or testing of a packaging or container which is represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in the transportation of hazardous material. This proposed rule concerns packaging, labeling, marking, placarding, and shipping documentation for hazardous materials. If adopted, this rule would preempt State, local, or Indian tribe requirements concerning these subjects unless the non-Federal requirements are "substantively the same" as the Federal requirements. RSPA lacks discretion in this area and preparation of a federalism assessment is not warranted. Federal law 49 U.S.C. 5125(b)(2) provides that if DOT issues a regulation concerning any of the covered subjects after November 16,1990, DOT must determine and publish in the Federal Register the effective date of Federal preemption. That effective date may not be earlier than the 90th day following the date of issuance of the final rule and' not later than two years after the date of issuance. RSPA proposed that the effective date of Federal preemption for these requirements be one year after publication of the final rule. C. Regulatory Flexibility Act This supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking would have minimal impact on shippers and carriers, some of whom may be small business entities. Based on information concerning the size and nature of entities likely affected by this rule, I certify that this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. D. Paperwork Reduction Act Many information collection requirements contained in the HMR are subject to approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-13) and OMB implementing regulations in 5 CFR 1320. RSPA is reevaluating information collection requirements for accuracy and conformance with the new law. Although neither this supplemental notice nor the preceding July 1993 notice specifically address sections of the regulations containing information collection requirements, applying the HMR to previously unregulated persons has the effect of making those persons subject to any applicable information CMA 111649 Federal Register / Vol. 61,-No. 55 / Wednesday, March 20, 1995^/ Proposed Rules 11489 collection requirements of the HMR. such as those requiring preparation of shipping papers. RSPA intends to make adjustments to current assessments of burden hours based on the effects of this rulemaking action, and anticipates publishing in the near future one or more notices in the Federal Register inviting comments on adjustments to currently approved collections and any new collections needed to comply with OMB requirements. DOT cannot impose a penalty on persons for violating information collection requirements which do not display a current OMB control number, if required. RSPA intends to obtain current OMB control numbers for any new or revised information collection requirements resulting from this rulemaking action prior to implementation of a final rule. E- Regulation Identifier Number (R1N) A regulation identifier numberJRIN) is assigned to each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulations. The Regulatory Information Service Center publishes the Unified Agenda in April and October of each year. The RIN number contained in the heading of this document can be used to cross-reference this action with the Unified Agenda. List of Subjects 49 CFR Part 171 Exports. Hazardous materials transportation, Hazardous waste, Imports, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 49 CFR Part 173 Hazardous materials transportation, Packaging and containers, Radioactive materials, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Uranium. 49 CFR Part 180 Hazardous materials transportation. Motor carriers, Motor vehicle safety, Packaging and containers. Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. In consideration of the foregoing, 49 CFR parts 171,173, and 180 are proposed to be amended as follows: PART 171--GENERAL INFORMATION, REGULATIONS, AND DEFINITIONS 1. The authority citation for part 171' would continue to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53. 2. Section 171.1 would be revised to read as follows: 171.1 Purpose and scope. other than transportation by motor (a) This subchapter prescribes requirements of the Department of vehicle. ***** Transportation governing-- (1) Offering of hazardous materials for PART 173--SHIPPERS-GENERAL transportation, and transportation of REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS hazardous materials in interstate, AND PACKAGINGS intrastate, and foreign commerce by rail car, aircraft, motor vehicle, and vessel (except as delegated at 1.46(t) of this title). (2) Representation that a hazardous 4. The authority citation for part 173 would continue to read as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5101-5127; 49 CFR 1.53. material is present in a package, container, rail car, aircraft, motor 5. A new 173.6 would be added to read as follows: vehicle, or vessel. (3) The manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance, reconditioning, repairing, or testing of a packaging or container which is represented, marked, certified, or sold for use in transportation. (b) Any person who, under contract with any department, agency, orinstrumentality of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Federal Government, transports, or causes to be transported or shipped, a hazardous material or manufactures, fabricates, marks, maintains, reconditions, repairs, or tests a package or container which is represented, marked, certified, or sold by such person as qualified for use in the transportation of a hazardous material shall be subject to and comply with all provisions of the Federal hazardous materials transportation law, all orders and regulations issued thereunder, and all other substantive and procedural requirements of Federal. State, and local governments and Indian tribes (except any such requirements that have been 173.6 Materials of trade exceptions. (a) A material of trade (see 171.8 of this subchapter) is not subject to any other requirements of this subchapter When transported by motor vehicle in conformance with this section. This section is limited to materials of trade that are-- (1) Classed in Division 2.1, 2.2, 4.1, 5.1, 5.2, 6.1, Class 3, 8, 9. or ORM-D; and (2) Contained in a packaging having a gross mass or capacity of-- (i) Not over 0.5 L (1 quart) or 0.5 kg (1 pound), for a Packing Group I material; (ii) Not over 30 kg (66 pounds) for solids or 30 L (8 gallons) for liquids, for a Packing Group II, Packing Group III, or ORM-D material; or (iii) Not over 75 kg (165 pounds), for a Division 2.1 or 2.2 material. (b) This section does not apply to a hazardous material that is-- (1) Self-reactive (see 173.124); (2) Poisonous by inhalation (see 173.133): or (3) Assigned any of the following UN preempted by the Federal hazardous identification numbers associated with materials transportation law or any the hazardous materials description in other Federal law), in the same manner the 172.101 Table: 1131, 1422, 1491, and to the same extent as any person 1504, 1798, 1873, 2031, 2495, 2626, engaged in such activities that are in or 2924, 2925. affect commerce is subject to such (c) The aggregate gross weight of all provisions, orders, regulations, and materials of trade on a motor vehicle requirements. may not exceed 150 kg (330 pounds). 3, In 171.8, a definition for "Material (d) Packaging. (1) Packagings must be of trade" would be added in leak tight for liquids and gases, sift alphabetical order to read as follows: proof for solids, securely closed, 171.8 Definitions and abbreviations. ***** secured against movement, and protected against damage. (2) Each material must be packaged in Material of trade means a hazardous the manufacturer's original packaging, material that is carried on a motor or a packaging of equal or greater vehicle-- strength and integrity. (1) For the purpose of protecting the (3) Outer packagings are not required health and safety of the motor vehicle for receptacles (e.g., cans and bottles) operator or passengers; that are secured against movement m (2) For the purpose of supporting the cages, carts, bins, boxes or operation or maintenance of the motor compartments. vehicle (including its auxiliary (4) For gasoline, a packaging must be equipment) in which it is carried; or made of metal or plastic and conform to (3) By a private motor carrier in direct requirements of this subchapter or support of a principal business that is requirements of the Occupational Safety CMA 111650 X reaeral Register / Vol. 61, No. 55 / Wednesday, March 20, 1996 / Proposed Roles and Health Administration of the (b) Cargo tanks for petroleum Authority: 49 U S C. 5101-5127, 49 CFR Department of Labor cont lined in 29 products. Notwithstanding requirements 1.53. CFR 1910.106. (5) A cylinder or other pressure vessel containing a Division 2.1 or 2,2 material must conform to packaging, qualification, maintenance, and use requirements of this subchapter, except that outer packagings are not required when transported as specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this section. (e) Hazard communication. (1) Except for a DOT specification cylinder, each package or receptacle (including a receptacle transported without an outer packaging) must be marked to indicate the hazardous material it contains. (2) A DOT specification cylinder (except DOT Specification 39) must be marked and labeled as prescribed by this subchapter. (3) The operator of a motor vehicle that contains a material of trade must be informed of the presence of the hazardous material and must be informed of the requirements of this section. (f) A material of trade may be for specification packagings in subpart F of this part 173 and part 178 of this subchapter, a non-specification cargo tank motor vehicle, that has a capacity 8. In 180.409, the introductory text of paragraph (a) would be revised, paragraph (b) would be redesignated as ofless than 13,250 liters (3,500 gallons) paragraph (c), and a new paragraph (b) and that is used in accordance with the would be added to read as follows: provisions of paragraph (c) of this section, may be used by an intrastate motor carrier for transportation of a 180.409 Minimum qualifications for Inspectors and testers. flammable liquid petroleum product. (a) Except as otherwise provided in (c) Additional requirements. A this section, any person performing or packaging used under the provisions of witnessing the inspections and tests paragraph (a) or paragraph (b) of this specified in 180.407(c) must-- section must-- ****# (1) Be operated exclusively by an intrastate motor carrier and used as a packaging for hazardous material prior to July 1,1996; (2) Conform to requirements of the State in which it is used; (b) A person who performs only annual external visual inspections and leakage tests on a cargo tank motor vehicle with a capacity of less than 13,250 liters (3,500 gallons) used ' (3) Be authorized by a State statute or exclusively for flammable liquid regulation in effect on and before July 1, petroleum fuels is not required to be 1996, for use as a packaging for the registered in accordance with subpart F hazardous material being transported; of Part 107 of this chapter. In addition, (4) Conform to all requirements in the person who signs the inspection transported on a motor vehicle under part 180 (except for 180.405(g)) of this report required by 180.417(b) of this the provisions of this section with subchapter in the same manner as subpart for such cargo tank motor hazardous materials other than required for a DOT specification MC 306 vehicles is not required to be registered. materials of trade without affecting the cargo tank motor vehicle. A cargo tank Although not required to register, a eligibility for exceptions provided by motor vehicle that is used under the person who performs visual inspections* this section. 6. A new 173.8 would be added to read as follows: 173.8 Exceptions (or non-epecification bulk packagings used in Intrastate transportation. (a) Non-specification bulk packagings. Notwithstanding requirements for specification packagings in subpart F of this pari 173 and parts 178 and 180 of this subchapter, a non-specification bulk packaging that is used in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (c) of this section may be used for transportation of a hazardous provisions of paragraph (b) of this section must meet these provisions on and after July 1,1999; (5) Be offered for transportation and transported in conformance with all other applicable requirements of this subchapter; and (6) Not be used to transport a flammable cryogenic liquid, hazardous substance, hazardous waste, or marine pollutant. PART 180--CONTINUING QUALIFICATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PACKAGINGS or leakage tests or signs the inspection reports must have the knowledge and ability to perform such inspections and tests and must perform them as required by this subchapter. ***** Issued in Washington, DC on March 13, 1996 under authority delegated in 49 CFR part 106. Alan I. Roberts, Associate Administratorfor Hazardous Materials Safety. [FR Doc. 96-6577 Filed 3-19-96: 8:45 am) BILLING cooe 4910-40-P material by an intrastate motor carrier 7. The authority citation for part 180 until June 30,1999, would continue to read as follows: 1 13098 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 1996 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Coast Guard 33 CFR Part 117 [CGD07-96-010] Drawbridge Operation Regulations: Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, FL agency: Coast Guard, DOT. action: Notice of deviation from regulations and request for comments. summary: Notice is hereby given that the Coast Guard issuing a temporary deviation to the regulations governing the J.D, Butler (Hillsboro Boulevard. State Road 810) drawbridge, mile 1050.0, at Deerfield Beach, from March 1,1996 through May 30,1996. This deviation authorizes the bridge owner to open the draw on signal, except that, from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Thursday, the draw need open only on the hour, Z0 minutes after the hour, and forty minutes after the hour: and from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Friday through Sunday and federal holidays, the draw need open only on the hour and half-hour. The purpose of this temporary change in opening schedule from Friday through Sunday and federal holidays is to test the feasibility of establishing a permanent change to the seasonal opening restrictions to reduce severe vehicular traffic congestion without unreasonably impacting navigation. DATES: This deviation is effective from March 1,1996 through May 30,1996, unless sooner terminated. Comments on the alternate schedule must be received on or before May 30, 1996. ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Commander (oan). Seventh Coast Guard District, Brickell Plaza Federal Building, Room 406, 909 SE. 1st Avenue, Miami, Florida 33131-3050. The comments and thor materials referenced in this notice will be available for inspection and copying at the above address. Normal office hours are between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal holidays. Comments may also be hand-delivered to the above address. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Brodie Rich, Bridge Management Specialist, Seventh Coast Guard District, at 305-536-5117, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Request for Comments The Coast Guard encourages interested persons to participate in this evaluation of possible changes to the regulations governing the J.D. Butler Drawbridge over the Atlantic intracoastal Waterway by submitting written data, or arguments for or against this deviation. Persons submitting comments should include their name, address, identify this rulemaking (CGD07-96-01Q) and give the reason for each comment. Persons wanting acknowledgment of receipt of comments should enclose a stamped self-addressed postcard or envelope. The Coast Guard will consider all comments received during the comment period and determine whether to initiate a rulemaking to propose a permanent change to the drawbridge operation schedule. Persons may submit comments by writing to the Commander (oan). Seventh Coast Guard District listed under ADDRESSES. Background and Purpose The City of Deerfield Beach has requested a change from the current seasonal operating schedule in Title 33 CFR I17.261(bb) to a year-round hour and half-hour opening schedule. A Coast Guard analysis of highway traffic and bridge opening data provided by the Florida Department of Transportation which was completed on May 8,1995. indicated the heavy traffic congestion is limited to weekends during the winter tourist season. This deviation will allow a test of the proposed hour and halfhour opening schedule during the heaviest highway and waterway traffic periods. If the test reduces highway traffic congestion without unreasonably impacting navigation, the Coast Guard plans to publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking which will request comments on a permanent change to the regulations. Public vessels of the United States, tugs with tows, and vessels in a situation where a delay would endanger life or property shall, upon proper signal, be passed through the draw at any time. This deviation from normal operating regulations (33 CFR 117.5) is authorized in accordance with the provisions of title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 117.43. Dated: March 7,1996. P.J. Cardaci. Captain US. Coast Guard, Commander, Seventh Coast Guard District, Acting, (FR Doc. 96-7171 Filed 3-25-96; 8:45 ami BILUNO COO* 4*10-t4-lfl 33 CFR Farts 154 and 155 46 CFR Parts 12,13,15,30, 31, 35, 78, 90, 97, 98,105,151,153, and 154 . [Docket No. CGD-79-116J RIN 2115-AA03 Qualifications for Tankermen, and for Persons In Charge of Transfers of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases AGENCY: Coast Guard. DOT. ACTION: Reopening of Comment Period on interim rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is reopening the period for public comment on its Interim Rule on the Qualifications for Tankermen, and for Persons in Charge of Transfers of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases. It would like public help in treating certain issues. DATES: The effective date remains March 31,1996, Written comments must be received not later than May 28, 1996. addresses: Written comments may be mailed to the Executive Secretary, Marine Safety Council (G-LRA, 3406), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street SW.. Washington. DC 20593-0001, or may be delivered to room 3406 at the same address between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m,, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, Comments will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at room 3406, Coast Guard Headquarters, between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. for further information contact: Mr, Mark C. Gould, Project Manager, Marine Safety and Environmental Protection Directorate, Office of Maritime Personnel Qualifications (GMOS-1), (202) 267-6890. This telephone is equipped to record messages on a 24-hour basis. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On Tuesday, April 4.1995 [60 FR 17134], the Coast Guard issued an Interim Rule on the Qualifications for Tankermen. and for Persons in Charge of Transfers of Dangerous Liquids and Liquefied Gases, The deadline for written comments was June 30,1995. Comments submitted during the comment period by the public and further evaluation of the Interim Rule by the Coast Guard revealed certain issues that require further evaluation, clarification, or correction. The Coast Guard has. therefore, decided to reopen the comment period. There is no need to refiie comments already submitted. The effective date of the interim Rule remains March 31,1996, CMA 111652 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26. 1996 / Rules and Regulations i:jQ99 Although the Coast Guard invites comments on any feature of the Interim .Rule, it specifically invites comments on.the following: f' TITLE 33--NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE * WATERS Section 155.710 Qualifications of person in charge. Paragraphs (a)(2)(ii), (b)(2), and (g) allow the PIC of cargo-tank cleaning on a vessel at a tank-cleaning facility or shipyard to hold a marine chemist's certificate issued by the National Fire Protection Association instead of the appropriate Tankerman-PlC endorsement. Numerous comments on the Interim Rule objected to this alternative. They stated that no marine chemist is qualified to act as a Tankarman-PIC. The Coast Guard will compare the qualifications for marine chemists with those for TankermanPICs. It invites comments. _ TITLE 43--SHIPPING Section 13.107 Tankerman endorsement: General. Section 15.660 Tankerman. There appears to be some confusion and disagreement regarding the term direct supervision as used in these sections. The Coast Guard defines being under direct supervision to mean being within the unobstructed view of the supervisor. If the PIC assigns a person to turn a particular value, and if this person bends down so that either the hands or the valve is not visible to the PIC, this person is not under direct supervision of the PIC. A fair equivalent might be being in "direct line of sight of the supervisor, or in close proximity to the transfer and maintaining direct, continuous communications by a convenient, reliable means, such as a band-held radio." The Coast Guard invites comments. Section 13.111 Restricted endorsement. This section lets an applicant apply - for a tankerman endorsement restricted . to specific cargoes or groups of cargoes, - specific vessels, specific facilities, y specific employers, or the like. The --Coast Guard intended for this jrendorsement to benefit oil and chemical ^companies that handle only one or two ^cargoes or that employ a small number. Spf tankerman, who conduct transfers at fed small number of sites. This feandorsement would relieve its holders yof having to take the DL or LG course cause those holders would have gfaquent opportunity to observe and BPMticipate in local transfers and would BPeve no need to observe or participate in others. The Coast Guard did not intend that a large oil or chemical company could employ a large number of tankerman with restricted endorsements. It invites comments. Section 13.113 Tankerman certified under prior regulations. Paragraph (a) allows certain persons who have acted as Tankermen-PICs before March 31.1996. to continue in that capacity. However, paragraph (d)(l)(iii)(A)(l) does not require any particular period of sea service, and paragraphs (d)(l)(iii)(A)(2) and (d)(l)(iii)(B) require only 30 days of sea service. None of these sections comply with the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978 (STCW), as amended in 1994, which requires 90 days of sea service on tankers. Since the United States is signatory to STCW, the Coast Guard considers itself bound to amend paragraphs (d)(l)(iii)(A)(l), (d)(l)(iii)(A)(2), and (d)(l)(iii](B) to require 90 days of sea service on tankers. It invites comments. Section 13.115 Licensed engineer: Endorsement as Tankerman-Engineer based on service on tankships before March 31,1996. This section requires that a licensed person with service as chief, first assistant, or cargo engineer before March 31,1996, obtain a TankermanEngineer endorsement to his or her MMD no later than the first renewal of the MMD after March 31,1997, if he or she intends to continue in any of those capacities. The Coast Guard intends that the final rule will allow service by one carrying temporary proof of the tankerman's qualifications as 13.113 did for Tankerman-PIC or TankermanPIC (Barge). But, as we have just seen, 13-113 itself comes up short--60 days short--measured against STCW, as amended in 1994. Therefore, to provide for an orderly transition to a regime governed by STCW, as amended in 1994, as well as to square $ 13.115 with $ 13.113 in its STCW-compatible form, the Coast Guard considers itself bound to amend paragraphs (a) andfb) to require 90 days ofsea service on tankers. It invites comments. In addition, STCW, as amended in 1994, requires that an applicant for this endorsement satisfactorily complete the appropriate DL or LG course. The Coast Guard is inclined to amend this section to require satisfactory completion of a L or LG course. However, the Coast Guard is willing to consider deferring the course requirement for a limited period of time, to give mariners a reasonable period of time to satisfactorily complete the course. It invites comments. Section 13.117 Any person: Endorsement as Tankerman-Assistant based on unlicensed deck service before March 31,1996. This section requires that a person with unlicensed deck service before March 31,1996. obtain a TankermanAssistant endorsement to his or her MMD no later than the first renewal of the MMD after March 31,1997, if he or she intends to continue in that capacity. The Coast Guard intends that the final rule will allow service by one carrying temporary proof of the tankerman's qualifications as 13.113 did for Tankerman-PIC or Tankerman-PIC (Barge). But, again as we have just seen, 13.113 itself comes up short--60 days short--measured against STCW, as amended in 1994. Therefore, to provide for an orderly transition to a regime governed by STCW, as amended in 1994, as well as to square $ 13,117 with S 13.113 in its STCW-compatible form, the Coast Guard considers itself bound to amend paragraphs (a) and (b) to require 90 days of sea service on tankers. It invites comments. Further, STCW, as amended in 1994, allows an applicant for this endorsement to satisfactorily complete a tanker-familiarization course rather than satisfy paragraph (a) or (b). Therefore, the Coast Guard is inclined to amend this section to allow satisfactory completion of this course, too. It invites comments. Further yet, STCW. as amended in 1994, requires that an application for this endorsement satisfactorily complete a firefighting course. The Coast Guard is included to amend this section to require satisfactory completion of this course, too. It invites comments. For the Tankerman-Assistant endorsement, the Coast Guard will accept pumpman service as well as the deck service described in $$13,117 and 13.403. It invites comments. Section 13.409 Eligibility requirements: Cargo course. This section allows an applicant for an endorsement as Tankerman-Assistant to substitute sea service for satisfactory completion of a course in DL or LG. But STCW, as amended in 1994, requires the same applicants to either (1) satisfactorily complete a tankerfamiliarization course or (2) prove 90 days of sea service on tankers. Therefore, the Coast Guard considers itself bound to amend this section to require either (1) satisfactory completion of a tanker-familiarization " CMA 111653 13100 Federal Register / Vol. 61. No. 59 / Tuesday, March 26, 1996 / Rules and. Regulations course, rather than of a course in DL or LG. or (2) 90 days of sea service on tankers, rather than an unspecified amount of sea service of an unspecified kind. It invites comments. Section 13.503 Eligibility requirements: Experience. This section allows an applicant for an endorsement as Tankerman-Engineer to combine sea service and satisfactory completion of a DL or LG course for the requisite experience. But STCW, as amended in 1994, requires that the same applicant both satisfactorily complete the appropriate DL or LG course and prove 90 days of sea service on tankers. Therefore, the Coast Guard is inclined to amend this section to require both, rather than some blend of them. It invites comments. Section 13.509 Eligibility requirements: Cargo course. This section allows an applicant for an endorsement as Tankerman-Engineer to substitute sea service for satisfactory completion of a course in DL or LG. But STCW, as amended in 1994, requires that the same applicant both satisfactorily complete the appropriate DL or LG course and prove 90 days of sea service on tankers. Therefore, the Coast Guard is inclined to amend this section to require both, rather than some blend of them. It invites comments. Dated: March 15, 1996. J.C. Card. Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Chief, Office ofMarine Safety, Security and Environmental Protection. (FR Doc, 96-7169 Filed 3-25-96: 8:45 am) BILLING CODE 4910-14-44 33 CFR Part 165 [CGD02-96-078] RIN 2115-AA97 Safety Zone; Lower Mississippi Rivsr, Mile 631.0 to Mile 635.0 agency: Coast Guard. DOT. action: Temporary rule. SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone on the Lower Mississippi River between mile 631.0 and mile 63S.0. This regulation is needed to restrict vessel traffic in the regulated area to prevent a collision with a sunken barge, surveying and salvage equipment and to provide a safe work area for survey and salvage personnel. OATES: This regulation is effective from 11 p.m. on March 12,1996, and terminates at 8 a.m. on September 31, 1996. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: ET Byron Black. Chief, Port Operations, Captain of the Port, 200 Jefferson Avenue. Suite 1301, Memphis, TN 38103, Phone: (901) 544-3941. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background and Purpose At approximately 10:10 p.m. on March 12,1996, the M/V ROBERT A KYLE reported that one iron barge had sunk at approximate mile 633.0 on the Lower Mississippi River. The sunken barge's exact location remains unknown and survey operations at Lower Mississippi River mile 633.0 will commence shortly. The navigable channel will be blocked during survey and salvage operations. A safety zone has been established on the Lower Mississippi River from mile 631.0 to mile 635.0 in order to facilitate safe vessel passage. Entry of vessels or persons into this zone is prohibited unless specifically authorized by the Captain of the Port. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553, a notice of proposed rulemaking was not published for this regulation and good cause exists for making it effective in less than 30 days after Federal Register publication. Publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking and delay of effective date would be contrary to the public interest because immediate action is necessary. Specifically, immediate action is necessary to facilitate the survey for the sunken barge's exam location. Harm to the public or environment may result if vessel traffic is not controlled during the operations. As a result, the Coast Guard deems it to be in the public's best interest to issue a regulation immediately. Regulatory Evaluation This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(0 of Executive Order 12866 and does not require and assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that order. It has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget under that order. It is not significant under the regulatory policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) (44 FR 11040: February 26,1979). The Coast Guard expects the economic impact of this proposal to be so minimal that a full Regulatory Evaluation under.paragraph lOe of the regulatory policies and procedures of DOT is unnecessary. Collection ofinformation This nils contains no information collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.)., Federalism The Coast Guard has analyzed this under the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 and has determined that this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. Environment Teh Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this rule and concluded that, under paragraph 2.B.2 of Commandant Instruction M16475.1B (as revised by 59 FR 38654: July 29, 1994), this rule is categorically excluded from further environmental documentation. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors. Marine safety. Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, . Vessels, Waterways. For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33 CFR Part 165 as follows: 1. The authority citation for Part 165 continues to read as follows: Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231: 50 U.S.C, 191. and 33 CFR 1.05-l(g), 6.04-1. 6.04-6, and 160.5; and 49 CFR 1.46. 2. A new temporary section 165.T02078 is added to read as follows: $ 165.T02-078 Safety Zone; Lower Mississippi River. (a) Location. The following area is a Safety Zone: Lower Mississippi River mile 631.0 to mile 635.0. (b) Effective dates. This section is effective from 11 p.m. on March 12, 1996, and terminates at 8 a.m. on September 31,1996. (c) Regulations. In accordance with the general regulations in 165.23. entry into this zone is prohibited except as authorized by the Captain of the Port. The Captain of the Port, Memphis, Tennessee, will notify the maritime community of conditions affecting the area covered by this safety zone by Marine Safety Information Radio Broadcast on VHF Marine Band Radio. Channel 22 (157.1 MHz). Dated: March 12. j 996. P.L. Mountcastle. Lieutenant Commander, USCG, Acting Captain ofthe Port IFR Doc. 96-7305 Filed 3-25-96, 8:45 ami SILUNG COM 4910-14-M CMA 111654